Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: The Time Is Now To Repeal PNA
Next Post: Rate the pro-Kinzinger cable ad and the Lauf intro video
Posted in:
* Exelon press release…
Exelon Corp. (Nasdaq: EXC) today announced its Board of Directors has approved a plan to separate Exelon Utilities (RemainCo), comprised of the company’s six regulated electric and gas utilities, and Exelon Generation (SpinCo), its competitive power generation and customer-facing energy businesses into two publicly traded companies with the resources necessary to best serve customers and sustain long-term investment and operating excellence. The separation gives each company the financial and strategic independence to focus on its specific customer needs, while executing its core business strategy. […]
SpinCo will operate the nation’s largest fleet of carbon-free nuclear power plants, which produced 150 million megawatt hours of electricity last year – enough to power 13.6 million homes and avoid more than 106 million metric tons of carbon emissions. The company also operates approximately 12,000 megawatts of hydroelectric, wind, solar, natural gas and oil generation assets, which provide a mix of baseload, intermediate and peak power generation. These characteristics make SpinCo uniquely positioned to advance the nation’s clean energy strategy and priorities.
To maintain the generation fleet’s legacy of safety, operational excellence and financial stewardship, the company will retire uneconomic assets that negatively affect its ability to provide a reliable source of clean power to tens of millions of American homes and businesses.
So, the fight over closing Illinois nuke plants will continue.
* Crain’s…
Approvals are needed from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and New York’s utility regulators. Illinois, where Exelon is based, will have no official say.
Exelon has faced calls from consumer advocates and others for years that it ought to split its regulated utilities like Commonwealth Edison from its unregulated power plants like the nuclear stations in Illinois.
…Adding… Illinois PIRG Director Abe Scarr…
Exelon’s ownership of ComEd has created long-standing conflicts of interests and Illinois consumers have suffered as a result.. Separating Exelon’s generation assets from its regulated utilities is good news for ComEd’s customers and the public. At the same time, Illinois policymakers should recognize that conflicts persist and take action to address them.
Every year, Exelon bills hundreds of millions of dollars of services to ComEd, a subsidiary it controls, a subsidiary which can fully recover those costs from its captured customers. Illinois policy has so far failed to adequately recognize, much less mitigate, the numerous potential conflicts inherent in this relationship.
The Illinois General Assembly has the opportunity this spring to begin undoing the policy harms of the ComEd bribery scandal. That means winning restitution for ComEd customers, restoring effective utility regulation by ending automatic rate hikes through formula rates, and reforming utility political influence by no longer allowing utilities to charge their customers for charitable contributions. Addressing the conflicts of interest that persist beyond an Exelon breakup should remain on the General Assembly’s agenda.
posted by Rich Miller
Wednesday, Feb 24, 21 @ 9:59 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: The Time Is Now To Repeal PNA
Next Post: Rate the pro-Kinzinger cable ad and the Lauf intro video
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
SpinCo and RemainCo? Seriously?
Comment by Excitable Boy Wednesday, Feb 24, 21 @ 10:08 am
@Excitable Boy: “Who are the ad wizards that came up with this one?”
Comment by Hello Friend Wednesday, Feb 24, 21 @ 10:11 am
This should have been forced on Exelon/ComEd years ago by the state. The fact they were able to be both a generator and deliverer of power meant the state was really never deregulated. They pretended to be separate entities when it was convenient, but were partners when it was time to flex their political muscle.
Now that it’s no longer politically (and financially) advantageous, they’re splitting up on their own. And Exelon will claim “oh, that wasn’t us” when ComEd’s deferred prosecution agreement comes up — which is of course, a load of BS.
Comment by TNT Wednesday, Feb 24, 21 @ 10:18 am
==Who are the ad wizards that came up with this one?==
Probably the creatives that came up with the “Washington Football Club.”
Comment by Gary Wednesday, Feb 24, 21 @ 10:20 am
I think the RemainCo - the ‘Re’ stands for regulated.
Not sure about SpinCo.
Comment by M Wednesday, Feb 24, 21 @ 10:20 am
And so the game goes on. Illinois Power did some of the same corporate games when they were the ones owning the Clinton plant.
Haven’t gone and read the details. But I’ll bet all the liabilities get shoved one way and all the profitability the other way.
Comment by RNUG Wednesday, Feb 24, 21 @ 10:23 am
SpinCo and RemainCo are actually fairly common terms for spin-offs until the new names are chosen.
Rich, I think people comment on energy issues on this blog about as much as they comment on the Senate.
Comment by Ok Wednesday, Feb 24, 21 @ 10:29 am
Exelon Corp excited to now offer twice as many internships
Comment by Third Reading Wednesday, Feb 24, 21 @ 10:40 am
SpinCo could be a takeoff on the industry term “spinning ready” but at a glance it looks like an inside joke with one part remaining with the old company and the other as the spin off.
Comment by former southerner Wednesday, Feb 24, 21 @ 10:43 am
To create electricity magnetized turbines are spun. Doubt they really want to close those plants as they would go from revenue generating assets, to a liability with quarterly reported decommissioning costs. That will mess up all kinds of financial ratios. Oh my, what to do with that nuclear waste for 10,000 years? Just because those nukes have no smokestacks do not be fooled; they are not as clean, safe and harmless as advertised.
Comment by Al Wednesday, Feb 24, 21 @ 11:13 am
As the spouse of someone who has been working on this for a while (but who never told me what the project was until today) I can tell you that SpinCo and RemainCo are just place holder names until new names are created.
Comment by bigredconservative Wednesday, Feb 24, 21 @ 11:25 am
Feels like a good time to scare people about having enough electricity in the state.
I’m all for the nukes remaining in Illinois, but what really needs to be done to make them economically feasible?
Comment by Cool Papa Bell Wednesday, Feb 24, 21 @ 11:33 am
Sounds like typical corporate policy: privatize the profits and socialize the losses
Comment by Friendly Bob Adams Wednesday, Feb 24, 21 @ 11:35 am
- SpinCo and RemainCo are actually fairly common terms for spin-offs until the new names are chosen. -
Thanks, did not know that.
Comment by Excitable Boy Wednesday, Feb 24, 21 @ 11:41 am
===what really needs to be done to make them economically feasible?===
Something they hope we never truly know. And how much profit is enough?
Comment by Simple Simon Wednesday, Feb 24, 21 @ 12:01 pm
Meanwhile, the local school districts impacted are completely ibn crisis mode. Byron gets 70-80% of their total revenue from the nuke plant. All the area state reps are calling for the state to help with finds to excelon or direct to the school and community. Given that these reps and senator are all hard right it their hypocrisy is not lost on me.
Byron got pretty fat on the nuke money. It is a fraction of what Excelon spent but it is hard to have much empathy for anyone involved.
Comment by JS Mill Wednesday, Feb 24, 21 @ 12:03 pm
I tend to be against subsidizing these nuclear plants. I don’t really think it should have been done last time and I think it flies in the face of the logic of deregulating generation. If we’re going to subsidize plants when competition drives down power prices, then we should have left them as utility owned.
Having said all that, I think its a mistake if anyone assumes the threats to close one or more plants is a bluff. And I also think its going to be very hard to ever (or any time remotely soon) go carbon free without most of these plants. So as I see it that’s the rub. When the market drives less cost effective plants out of business, that’s a good thing in some ways, and in some ways was the goal of deregulation. But it is also counterproductive in terms of reducing emissions.
Comment by AndyIllini Wednesday, Feb 24, 21 @ 12:34 pm
Good thing we delayed that prosecution of COMED so they can blackmail the state again. Thanks.
Comment by allknowingmasterofraccoodom Wednesday, Feb 24, 21 @ 1:24 pm
==very hard to ever…go carbon free without most of these plants===
Carbon tax.
Comment by Senator Clay Davis Wednesday, Feb 24, 21 @ 1:29 pm
Illinois ratepayers alone should not support the plants when the power is often sold elsewhere. Federal or regional policy is a better solution.
Comment by Simple Simon Wednesday, Feb 24, 21 @ 3:47 pm
===what really needs to be done to make them economically feasible?===
A major reduction in access to dirt cheap natural gas would be a big help.
Comment by Oxfordian Wednesday, Feb 24, 21 @ 4:06 pm
Is now the time for the state to buy them via eminent domain, or once the closure date is set and approved? Call the bluff and force them to sell once they have made the case that they are worthless assets.
Comment by thechampaignlife Wednesday, Feb 24, 21 @ 5:09 pm
Would be fun to have a naming contest for RemainCo and SpinCo.
Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Feb 24, 21 @ 6:02 pm
This company never fails to have others prop up their bottom line and the GA helps them however they can…
Comment by Loop Lady Thursday, Feb 25, 21 @ 7:53 am